About 60 protestors, officials and residents from Washington and Greene counties turned out at the State Office Building, Downtown, yesterday to hear why Allegheny Power needs to construct a new high-voltage power line in their area.

And for more than six hours, a representative from a regional electric transmission planning agency tried to explain as he was grilled for answers.

It's becoming routine now for Steven Herling of PJM Interconnection, who has gone through similar questioning in two other states.

A steady stream of protestors from Stop the Towers, a grass-roots citizens group, picketed in front of the building for most of the day, while the state Public Utility Commission began a three-week hearing inside to gather technical evidence regarding Allegheny Power's application to construct a 37-mile, 500-kilovolt electric transmission line.

The line would begin at a substation in North Strabane, Washington County, and continue into Greene County, where it would turn eastward, running for 200 miles through West Virginia and Maryland and eventually ending in northern Virginia.

The plan has met with stiff resistance locally and in several other states chiefly because of its association with the Energy Act of 2005, which includes provisions that would give the federal government the authority to step in and grant a construction permit for electric transmission projects even if a state denies one.

Public fears have centered on the Allegheny Power project as one of the first potential test cases for the federal law because the timing of the application coincides with preparations by the U.S. Department of Energy to begin considering transmission projects that are rejected or restrained by states.

Allegheny Power has gone through evidentiary hearings in Virginia and West Virginia, where decisions on its applications there are expected by summer. The PUC expects to make its decision by September.

During the next several weeks, the company is expected to provide the PUC with 17 witnesses to back up its claim that the power line is needed to forestall power shortages and possible brownouts within the next several years if growing demand isn't addressed with more capacity.

The Greensburg-based company also will be expected to defend its choice of route, along with other details of the plan.

Two administrative law judges, Michael Nemic and Mark Hoyer, heard testimony yesterday from Mr. Herling, vice president of planning for PJM, which is charged with planning electric transmission needs for much of the eastern United States, including 13 states and Washington, D.C.

Mr. Herling submitted written testimony and was cross-examined briefly by Dianne Dusman, senior assistant consumer advocate at the Pennsylvania Office of Consumer Advocate, or OCA, then for the remainder of the day by Will Burns, a lawyer for the Energy Conservation Council of Pennsylvania. The council is the legislative and legal arm of Stop the Towers.

Mr. Herling was quizzed about the necessity of constructing the power line in Pennsylvania and whether other options had been considered.

During examination by Ms. Dusman, Mr. Herling said PJM did not consider environmental impacts or issues involving eminent domain when considering the power line, and the group's decision was driven by electric reliability needs.

He testified that Allegheny Power brought forth potential reliability issues that could occur in the coming years due mostly to increased growth in northern Washington County. He said that PJM confirmed those findings and ordered Allegheny Power to find a fix.

Under questioning by Mr. Burns, Mr. Herling said PJM did not consider voltage devices, demand-side management and other tools that may have mitigated the need for a high-voltage power line.

He said PJM felt the demand needs over the next 15 years would be too serious to be addressed solely through alternative methods.

Mr. Herling is expected to continue testifying tomorrow.

Also testifying will be three witnesses for the Energy Conservation Council, two from the OCA, and one from the PUC office of trial staff, who is expected to raise doubts regarding the necessity of the project and whether all practical options had been explored before the plan was introduced.

Allegheny Power spokesman Doug Colafella said the company is confident it can convince the PUC that the project is necessary for continued energy stability in the area.

"We've tried all along to demonstrate that there's a strong local need for this project," he said.

Although they were not permitted to testify or speak during the hearing, members of Stop the Towers said they plan to attend every day and to continue being a part of the process.

"This has been a year of work and stress and sweat for us and we want to be here to see what's going on," said property owner Margaret Moran of North Bethlehem, Washington County.